Misunderstood misunderstanding: social identities and public uptake of science

TLDR

Public uptake of science depends on trust and credibility invested in institutions, which are shaped by social relationships and identities that people feel affected by scientific knowledge. The study uses a case of Cumbrian sheep farmers’ responses to post‑Chernobyl restrictions to derive general insights into how the public receives scientific knowledge. The authors analyze the farmers’ reactions to scientific advice following the Chernobyl fallout to explore how social identities influence the reception of science. The analysis shows that credibility of scientific communication is shaped by social relationships, that laypeople reflect on their local versus outside knowledge, and that encouraging reflexive discourse by institutions could enhance public uptake.

Abstract

This paper draws general insights into the public reception of scientific knowledge from a case study of Cumbrian sheep farmers' responses to scientific advice about the restrictions introduced after the Chernobyl radioactive fallout. The analysis identifies several substantive factors which influence the credibility of scientific communication. Starting from the now-accepted point that public uptake of science depends primarily upon the trust and credibility public groups are prepared to invest in scientific institutions and representatives, the paper observes that these are contingent upon the social relationships and identities which people feel to be affected by scientific knowledge, which never comes free of social interests or implications. The case study shows laypeople capable of extensive informal reflection upon their social relationships towards scientific experts, and on the epistemological status of their own `local' knowledge in relation to `outside' knowledge. Public uptake of science might be improved if scientific institutions expressed an equivalent reflexive discourse in the public domain.